Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Possession of instrument

Legal area

Court

24 May 1991

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. CHAU WAI MING

Citation

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. CHAU WAI MING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR3/1991

Although tariff authorities required a substantially higher starting point for non-domestic burglary, the Court refused the Attorney General's application to increase the sentence because of the case's unusual facts (including the respondent's personal/familial circumstances and rehabilitative considerations) and declined to interfere; the decision is made as an exception and is not to form a precedent for future sentences.
23 Aug 1978

SHUM MAN-KEUNG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

SHUM MAN-KEUNG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC711/1978

The convictions were unsafe because the trial involved improper introduction of the appellant's statements and use of an antecedents statement contrary to established authority, producing prejudice that could not be cured; accordingly the convictions were quashed and sentences set aside.
20 Nov 1974

LAM CHUN-MIN v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LAM CHUN-MIN v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC934/1974

The appeal was dismissed because the prosecution evidence, accepted by the Magistrate, established possession of syringes and equipment capable of injecting dangerous drugs; the in-court amendment to charge was treated as valid because it was read and explained to the accused and the accused was afforded opportunity to respond but declined, therefore the conviction under Section 36(1) was upheld.

Hong Kong Case Law

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. CHAU WAI MING

SHUM MAN-KEUNG v. THE QUEEN

LAM CHUN-MIN v. THE QUEEN